Journal article Open Access
Extended Peer Review as Quality Assurance in Scientific Policy Advice
Knie, Andreas; Simon, Dagmar
In academia, there is a clear understanding of how the quality of research work is assessed. This is done by academic peers in a peer review process. It is only then, through the discourse of expert opinion, that it is possible to determine whether the quality of a paper is good or poor. The peers themselves also determine when science is excellent without using formal criteria or even indicators. Science thus has a monopoly on quality; it alone can determine what is considered of high or low quality. This procedure, which has been tried and tested for centuries and internationally, is elegant and reduces transaction costs. However, peer review has an disadvantage as well, namely that it works exclusively within academia and draws on the expertise of academics. Yet, when the boundaries of the academic system are crossed, academic peers lose their authority because other indicators then take effect and the discourse space is opened.
| Name | Size | |
|---|---|---|
|
EITL_ Knie & Simon_ Quali-Politikberatung (4).pdf
md5:68c194e382a964c763a69bafac8b5814 |
145.3 kB | Download |
| All versions | This version | |
|---|---|---|
| Views | 61 | 42 |
| Downloads | 30 | 18 |
| Data volume | 4.4 MB | 2.6 MB |
| Unique views | 54 | 36 |
| Unique downloads | 27 | 16 |
- Publication date:
- April 11, 2022
- DOI:
-
- Keyword(s):
- impact scientific policy advice EITL
- License (for files):
- Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International